Volume 4, Issue 1 (October 2015) Volume 7, Issue 2 (2018) http://www.hawaii.edu/sswork/jisdhttp://umanitoba.ca/faculties/social_work/research/jisd/ http://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/ E-ISSN 2164-9170 handle/10125/37602 pp. 1-21 E-ISSN 2164-9170 pp. 1-15 Reaching Harmony Across Indigenous and Mainstream Roles of Indigenous Conflict Resolution Mechanisms for Maintaining Social Solidarity and ResearchStrengthening Contexts: Communities An Emergent in Alefa District Narrative, North West of Ethiopia CatherineAjanaw E. Alemie Burnette TulaneUniversity University of Gondar ShanondoraHone Mandefro Billiot WashingtonUniversity University of Gondar in St. Louis Keywords: conflict consensus building indigenous conflict resolution mechanisms Key Wordsindigenous knowledge social solidarity Indigenous research • power • decolonizing research • critical theory Abstract AbstractEthiopia has been practicing various indigenous conflict resolution mechanisms for many centuries. ResearchThe study with onindigenous which this communities article is isbased one ofwas the aimed few areas at describ of researching the role of indigenous conflict encompassingresolution profound mechanisms controversies, for maintaining complexities, social ethical solidarity responsibilities, and strengthening and communities in Alefa historicaldistrict context. D escriptiveof exploitation qualitative and harm. research Often methodthis complexity was used becomes with semi-structured face-to-face overwhelminglyinterview apparents to collect to the data. early Thematic career researcher analysis who was endeavors employed to maketo analyze the data. The findings meaningfulreveals contributions that indigenous to decolonizing conflict research. resolution Decolonizing mechanisms research are hasmore the flexible than the formal court capacityprocedures. to be a catalyst Indigenous for the improved conflict wellbeing resolution and positive typically social involves change among consensus building based on open indigenousdiscussions communities to exchange and beyond. information Te purpose and of thisclarify critical issues analysis about is tothe reach conflict. The desired end result of indigenous conflict resolution mechanisms is a sense of harmony, solidarity and shared dialogue harmony across mainstream and indigenous research contexts. We martial critical among conflicting parties not punishment. The absence of clear policy direction in the application theory ofto indigenousdeconstruct barriersconflict to resolution decolonizing mechanisms research, such has as been power found inequities, to be a limiting factor. Indigenous and identifyconflict strategies resolution to overcome mechanisms these barriers. have greatFirst, untappedwe critically potential analyze thein maintaining social solidarity historicalamong context a multiethnic of decolonizing and multiculturalresearch with societyindigenous such communities. as Ethiopia whereNext, inter-communal conflicts are we analyzeprevalent the concept. of “insider” and “outsider” research. We identify barriers and strategies toward fnding harmony across indigenous and mainstream research paradigms and contexts. INTRODUCTION Few areas encompass the profound controversy, complexities, ethical Societies world-wide have long used indigenous mechanisms to prevent and resolve responsibilities, and historical context as research with indigenous communities (Burnetteconflicts. & Sanders,In every 2014; community, Burnette, Sanders,systems Butcher, of indigenous & Salois, conflict2011; Deloria, resolution often based on 1991;community Smith, 2007; customs, Smith, familial 2012). relationships,Te depth of thisor embedded tension is inoverwhelmingly institutional practices run alongside apparent to the early career researcher who endeavors to make meaningful contributionsthe formal throughstate sanctioned research with processes indigenous (Macfarlane, communities 2007 (Burnette; Mapara, & Sanders, 2009). In a society where the 2014;majority Burnette, of the Sanders, populace Butcher, is poor & Rand, with widespread2014). As Mihesuah illiteracy (2006) culminating aptly notes, in lack of access to justice “So many indigenous people and our allies are fnding their voices, and they are expressingand the theirhigh thoughts.cost and Butscarcity speaking of laoutwyers, can still traditional be precarious, conflict especially resolution for stands out as the best thosemethod who haven’tof conflict graduated resolution. or haven’t In received Ethiopia, tenure…” many (p.rural 131). and village communities do not refer Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Share Alike License ALEMIE & MANDEFRO Indigenous Conflict Resolution Mechanisms 2 complaints to the police or prosecuting authorities, but instead deal with them using indigenous tribal processes (Macfarlane, 2007; Gowok, 2008). In Ethiopia various indigenous conflict resolution mechanisms has been practiced for many centuries (Gowok, 2008; Endalew, 2014). These indigenous conflict resolution mechanisms are deeply rooted in different ethnic groups of Ethiopia. They are associated with the cultural norms and values of the peoples and gain their legitimacy from the community values instead of the state. Besides, due to the multi-ethnic composition of the country, indigenous conflict resolution mechanisms of Ethiopia are different from ethnic group to ethnic group. As a result, they do not have uniform application all over the country (Endalew, 2013). In the ancient days and most especially under the Fetha Negast [law of the kings], conflicts between individuals or communities were encouraged to be settled amicably at local level. Elders- Shimagelle - or people appointed on ad-hoc basis to settle disputes played an important role in resolving conflicts. Even today, these mechanisms are widely practiced among the various ethnic groups to settle various conflicts and many other problems. For instance, the institutions of Gadaa among the Oromo, the Shimagelle by the Amhara and other ethnic groups are practiced (Gowok, 2008). Moreover, even after passing through the procedures and penalties in the criminal court, some indigenous Ethiopians tend to use the indigenous conflict resolution mechanism for reconciliation and in order to control acts of revenge (Endalew, 2014). However, regardless of their wider popular acceptance throughout the country, indigenous conflict resolution mechanisms have been marginalized since the 1950s and 1960s when the imperial regime was engaged in the extensive codification and overhaul of the existing laws with the aim of unifying and modernizing the laws. In the enactments codified at that time, indigenous conflict resolution mechanisms related to family relations and interpretations of contracts were incorporated as long as these practices did not contradict the Codes (Bahta, 2014). Indigenous conflict resolution mechanisms are not recognized by law and not properly organized (Endalew, 2014). Furthermore, in Ethiopia, there is lack of proper attention given to protect, develop, and utilize indigenous conflict resolution mechanisms in the development process. Since recent years, these indigenous conflict resolution mechanisms received growing attention as evidenced by an increase in research activities, publications, and policy interest as well as a growing attention given by the government, judiciary and the civil society (Gowok, 2008). Several authors [Dejene, 2002; Desalegn, Mukand, Ashim & Seleshi, 2005; Kelemework, 2011; Journal of Indigenous Social Development Volume 7, Issue 2 (2018) ALEMIE & MANDEFRO Indigenous Conflict Resolution Mechanisms 3 Yonas, 2012; Abebe, Samson & Tessema, 2015; Daniel, 2016] studied indigenous conflict resolution mechanisms in Ethiopia on various issues such as nature, process and roles of elders in conflict resolution. However, most of these studies predominantly focused on the nature, process, and roles of elders in the indigenous conflict resolution mechanisms. They did not emphasize the role of indigenous conflict resolution mechanisms for maintaining social solidarity and social order of communities. Furthermore, in Ethiopia, indigenous knowledges including indigenous conflict resolution are largely oral, undocumented, and not systematically organized to be used in the development process. Hence, this study will contribute to fill this gap and contribute to stimulate debates on how to develop the knowledge by using Alefa as a case study. The study answered the following research questions. What is the nature and processes of indigenous conflict resolution mechanisms? What are the roles and challenges of indigenous conflict resolution mechanisms in Alefa district? Alefa is one of the districts of North Gondar Zone found in Amhara National Regional State. Alefa district is located at 162 km in southwest of Gondar city and 909 km from Addis Ababa (CSA, 2011). It is believed that Alefa is named after the historic region to the southwest of Lake Tana, which was the target of a punitive expedition led by Emperor Susenyos in 1608 (Huntingford, 1989). The total geographical coverage of the district is 2043.07 square kilometer. In 2012, the population size of Alefa was 204, 301 with 100 density per square kilometer. The majority of the people in the district earn their living from agriculture. Crop production and livestock development are the major agricultural activities (Bureau of Finance and Economic Development, 2013). Alefa district is commonly known in conflict including blood feuds. In the